This is derived from something I wrote on Twitter. It includes ideas that I have discussed on this blog before.

It doesn’t matter if the leftist-progressives are hypocrites when it comes to “man-made climate change”, if climate change is true. Their hypocrisy, however, shows that they do not actually believe in “man-made climate change”.

It’s no good shouting “Science Denier!”, when by your actions you also deny “Climate Change”. There are people who are true believers in the idea that man’s activities are causing drastic changes in the earth’s climate, and which outweigh such natural phenomena as the Sun, but there are many, many people who only promote the “Climate Change” theory for personal gain.

Included in this latter group are extremely wealthy people who like to lecture others about “Carbon footprints” and “renewable energy”, but who are not themselves willing to forgo even a little of their luxurious comforts to “save the environment”. I am describing people like Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Hillary Clinton (these people are usually leftist-progressives, for some reason). They live in extravagantly large homes, have multiple automobiles, fly in private jets around the world AND I AM HAPPY FOR THEM!!! “The prettiest sight in this fine, pretty world is the privileged class enjoying its privileges.”~McCauley Conner, from The Philadelphia Story.

I would like to be wealthy, too, and enjoy such luxury; I made other choices. But I digress.

The problem with people like Al Gore, DiCaprio, and their ilk is that they cannot be content with being wealthy. They suffer from a strange form of narcissism, which prevents them from enjoying their “privileges” if they think that too many other people have access to said privileges. It’s not enough to enjoy a big bowl of ice cream if the guy at the next table is also enjoying a bowl of ice cream. As an aside, the agitation that some in the media showed at President Trump getting “two scoops of ice cream” when everyone else only got one scoop is strange when considering their disinterest in the size of Al Gore’s house. Anyway, these wealthy narcissists seem to have a primal need to be seen as a “Very Important Person”. It is life and breath to them. One of the marks of the VIP is that he enjoys stuff that most people can’t–the luxury hotel room, the SUV limousine, the private jet–even though using these things create an outsized “carbon footprint”. THEY get to enjoy these things because they’re Important People. Again, I do not begrudge them their lifestyle; I wish (sometimes) that I moved in the same strata. I would not, however, work to keep other people out.

This need for being perceived as aristocracy explains, I think, their opposition to Free Market Capitalism. Capitalism does a tremendous job in raising people from poverty, and further, satisfying wants as well as needs. Capitalism commodifies luxuries, and the Wealthy Narcissist VIPs hate that. So, they try to circumvent the benefits of the Free Market through government regulation–with this “Paris Climate Agreement” being a fine example.

The U.S. doesn’t need an international treaty to lower its “Carbon Emissions” or CO2, or whatever it’s supposed to do to “save the environment”. The nation can, and has, lowered it’s pollution levels dramatically over the past few decades. Treaties, such as the Paris one, are there, not to do anything about man-made climate change, but to rig the system against those who might benefit from Capitalism. The treaty is there to provide cover to the Wealthy Narcissists who want to make themselves seem important by destroying people’s livelihoods and the ability to acquire a modicum of economic comfort.

“No, no; you can’t enjoy the things I enjoy. It’s the law! Now shut up, and eat your beans. After you watch me eat this steak.”

There is an idea floating around on Twitter and elsewhere that President Trump fired Comey to shut down an investigation into the ties between the Trump presidential campaign and the Russian government. Cue the comparisons between Trump and Nixon.

I don’t think that Trump thinks along those lines, though. He is a “celebrity”, not a politician; otherwise, he would have hesitated to fire Comey, or ask for his resignation, or something. Maybe leak pictures of Comey cavorting with whores of Babylon (everyone who goes to D.C. gets pictures of themselves cavorting with whores of Babylon; it’s kind of a thing).

I think, rather, that what Trump is doing is whacking someone who made him “look stupid”. It’s his M.O. in situations such as this, where he looks naïve for trusting the wrong people. Paul Manafort turned out to have ties to the Russian mob; Trump kicked him out the door without so much as a “thank you”. Michael Flynn “lied” to V.P. Pence, and so was given the boot. Now, FBI Director Comey recently claimed that Huma Abedin forwarded “hundreds and thousands” of emails from Hillary’s server to her husband, Anthony Wiener. This is an extremely serious accusation, which would tend to help Trump, who argued during the campaign that Hillary was unfit to be President because she was unscrupulous about handling state information. It turned out the Comey exaggerated. Trump fired him as a result. I don’t think it’s any more complicated than that.

UPDATE: Well, it could be a little more complicated, perhaps. One of the early commenters to the Hotair article linked above speculates that James Comey was the source of the FBI leaks, and that Pres. Trump waited until Comey was out of town to fire him, so that he (Comey) couldn’t destroy evidence.

A few weeks ago, I was listening to Trump give a speech at one of his rallies, and I was laughing. I wasn’t laughing at him, necessarily, although that accounted for part of my mirth. For some reason, I just found whole scenario–the things he was saying, the cadence of his words, the enthusiasm of his supporters, the fact that he was the GOP nominee, the possibility that Hillary might lose the election–amusing, even joyful. I don’t remember what he said–his usual shtick, probably: “build the Messican wall, throw Hillary over it, have her toss our jobs back to us”…

My mother called me the morning of the election, and asked what I thought. I said I wasn’t sure, but it certainly looked like Hillary would win, based on the polling, and that the Democrats would win the Senate, but that the Republicans would retain control of the House of Representatives. Divided government, and then in 2018, the GOP would win back control of the Senate, for sure. All the conventional things people interested in politics “knew” that morning.

I voted for the Darrell Castle/Scott Bradley Constitution Party ticket. Since no Constitution Party candidates were listed for the other offices, I voted Libertarian Party for everything else. I’m done with the GOP. That’s right: I live on the edge.

At 21:00 Tuesday night, while switching back and forth between Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and the Blaze Network, I gathered that Hillary would win the Presidency with somewhere north of 300 electoral votes, that the GOP would keep the House, as expected, and that the GOP just might possibly also keep the Senate. It was good enough for me, so to bed I went. At 01:00, I awoke, and checked the phonernet. Real Clear Politics said Trump had won with 274 Electoral votes. Suspicious, I returned to watching the four networks. None of them had Trump as the winner, but all of them had Trump ahead with (depending on the station) 244 or 254 Electoral votes. I did not get back to sleep. By the next day, it turned out that the election returns were just as predicted, except that Trump won.

Everyone “knows” now why Donald Trump won. He touched that place in people’s hearts that politicians so want to touch: the place that activates their unreasoning and unassailable loyalty. He made ridiculous promises and gave only the vaguest explanation of how he would fulfill those promises, but it didn’t matter to his supporters. “Trust Me.” “Believe Me.” He talked about bringing jobs back from Mexico and China that had actually gone to robots in Alabama. He said that he would build a wall between the border of the U.S. and Mexico, and that Mexico would pay for it. He promised to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”). He did not give his plans on how he would do these things. “Trust Me.” “Believe Me.” Trump supporters did what he said.

Of course, not all Trump voters believe him; a lot of people were voting against Hillary, and so helped push Trump to victory, but consider him with the same enthusiasm as one would a snake poking its head out of the toilet. This is why it is incorrect to label everyone who voted for Trump as a hateful bigot who hates the hated. But, why would they vote for someone so detestable if they didn’t in some way approve of him? Because they honestly thought Hillary was worse. If you don’t already understand why someone would think this, it’s not likely you can understand it. This is one of the hazards of making every election a binary choice–people have different personal beliefs on what constitutes a “greater evil”. But what about the awful things people accused Trump of doing? “They’re just accusations. Innocent until proven guilty, ha, ha. Hillary’s worse.” ~Trump Voter, not Supporter.

What about the things that Trump said to Billy Bush?

I can’t speak for the non-supporter Trump voter (NSTV), but I do have a thought about this. I didn’t hear the entire conversation, but I agree that it sounded pretty bad. It was even worse that Billy Bush kept pressuring his female co-host to give Trump hugs and such. I also agree, in part, that it wasn’t “locker-room talk”. Locker room talk involves mainly one-upmanship about one’s “manliness” (by using a plethora of metaphors and similes), not discussions about assaulting women. There is another sort of darker humor, though, best exemplified by the joke known as “The Aristocrats”. I will allow the reader the opportunity to research this “joke” himself, but I will explain that the point of the joke is not to be funny through cleverness (it has a rather obvious and dull punchline), but by being as explicitly offensive and profane as possible while telling it. The humor lies in how uncomfortable the joke teller can make his audience feel. (“I can’t believe he went there! Tee-hee!”) Howard Stern does something like this, and quite well, if you are into that sort of humor. I think that, based on the portion of video I saw of Trump and Billy Bush, this was what Trump was attempting to do. He was trying to be as outlandishly offensive as possible, as an attempt at humor. I say this with the understanding that I was not there, did not hear the whole conversation, and am not personally acquainted with Trump and so cannot judge his character as to whether he would actually assault women in the manner he described. Several women came afterward and accused him of assaulting him in the manner he described, so my theory may not be correct.

But I digress.

Post-Election Wednesday, the Trump True Believers Squad was ecstatic. The Hillary Booster Club members were devastated–some of them are still protesting/rioting, as of Saturday night (11/12). The #NeverTrumpers were split, with some sort of happy, and some soaking their hankies. I felt…well, I felt relief. I did not want Hillary to be President, at all. I don’t like Progressivism; I don’t like Statism; I don’t like bullies who use the government to punish people who disagree with them. So, naturally, I also did/do not want Trump to be President. People claim he’s a brilliant businessman, but at best he’s a crony capitalist, and so is a poor representative for the Free Market. People look at him and denounce Capitalism almost reflexively. There is a popular saying among the Trump True Believers that he will “run the government like a business”, which, considering Trump’s track record, is terrifying; but even were he as brilliant in (real, free-marketplace style) business as people claim, we should not want the government “run like a business” for the simple fact that a business seeks always to increase its market share, and that’s the last thing we should want the government to do. Believe Me.

As an aside, Trump has a significant portion of his base a group calling themselves the “Alt-Right”. These are not libertarian free-marketeers, but rather a group who thinks that using the government to oppress people is wrong unless they are the ones in control of it–in which case they want the government to be all-powerful. Think of them as sort of the mirror-image of Progressives. It is this group that gives the Trump movement its stigma of racism and anti-Semitism. They’re the ones who are sending mean tweets and calling people names. They think that the recent Trump electoral victory gives their movement validity, and so are now “feeling their oats”, to use a pre-coined phrase. I think the Alt-right is too small a movement to fear–at present–but it is one we should probably monitor with some vigilance. Berlin wasn’t built in a day, and all that jazz.

But, as I say, I felt relief at the election results. I attribute this to my ingrained sense of partisanship, which I must work to eliminate, because the GOP has exposed itself as being every bit as anti-conservative, anti-liberty, anti-limited government as the Democratic Party. Still, I enjoy watching videos of leftists having breakdowns; I enjoy reading stories of progressives shocked into incoherence. I enjoy the victory marches of the Trump crowd, as they make people (including myself) eat a heaping plate of cold-pressed crow.

I don’t enjoy the uncertainty and despair of my friends, though. I have friends and acquaintances whom I would describe as “very liberal”, politically, and for whom I would willingly jump into the fire to save. When I say “jump into the fire”, I mean that I would push them to safety, and then die, screaming in agony, and be caught on video waving my arms in a silly manner, which video would then become an internationally famous Internet meme that mean people would use to mock my pain. I would willingly go through all that because I love my friends, and am loyal, even though we vociferously disagree on politics. Some things are more important than winning elections or having the “right policy” in place.

I wish it wasn’t like this. I wish that a Presidential election didn’t result in people feeling despair. Disappointment, sure; that’s natural. But it should have little more significance that Bob Muckenfutch defeated Molly Simperwingding than that the Cubs defeated the Indians. Okay, maybe a bit more significance; but, after all, as our Founding Fathers set it up, the Executive Branch is supposed to execute the laws passed by the Legislative Branch. We shouldn’t be describing the President as the “Leader of the Free World™”; at best–Constitutionally speaking–he is Congress’ errand runner. Even as “Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces”, he should not be sending troops anywhere without Congress’ approval. If there is a “Leader of the Free World™”, then it is the Speaker of the House. The qualifications for President should hinge on how effective an administrator the candidate is, not the vision he (or she) has for the future, or how hard she (or he) can whack our political opponents. Ironically, from what I have read and heard, Hillary Clinton by this measure would be vastly preferable to Trump, even for far-right conservatives. She is intelligent and well informed and extremely hard-working. Unfortunately, as it stands today, a President Clinton would not be a mere administrator of the nation’s laws, but would attempt to create a utopia. President-elect Trump also wants to create a utopia, of course. Every President wants to create utopia. It’s up to us to stop them; stop them all, I say.

I am an idealist; I believe that the world as it is could be made better. I think we need to go back to the idea that government can’t save us all; it can’t feed us all; it can’t make us all enjoy warm fuzzy feelings in our souls. We give up some of our humanity, I think, by using government to assist the poor and oppressed. I could be wrong; I’m willing to discuss the matter. I think that an armed populace is more important to national defense than a (practically speaking) standing army that one man can send into foreign countries on a whim. I could be wrong; I’m willing to discuss it. I think that it’s more important to protect private property rights than it is to protect people’s feelings. I could be wrong; I’m willing to discuss it.

The President, in my opinion, has too much power. The entire Federal Government has too much power. It should not be intervening in our lives at the level that it does. It should not be our proxy for dealing with each other. Elected officials should not be thought of as our superiors. In fact, all government officials should be considered to be our agents, not our leaders. It’s called “The House of Representatives”, after all, not “The House of Overlords”. A representative is someone you hire to act in your interest, at your direction, so that you can attend to more important things. A representative ain’t the boss of you. He is given his authority by you (and all the other voters in your district, of course). If he misbehaves, or breaks the laws, then the voters can switch him out for someone they think will do a better job. We do have the responsibility to monitor our employees, as any good boss does, and that includes Presidents that we hire to enforce our laws that were passed by the Representatives that we hired. This is how we all can build hope in these dark days: by knowing that, with proper coaching, we can ensure that even a President Trump could prove to be an exemplary employee. We can disagree about the proper methods, but we can do so civilly. But success will depend on us working together. Believe me.

Finally, if there is anyone still reading this, I want to make what I consider the most important point: none of this matters, in the long run. Not the free market, not democracy, not baseball, not defeating terrorism, not anything. The only thing that matters is the Kingdom of God. The whole world is not enough to compensate for lost souls. If you have not trusted Jesus Christ for salvation, I beg you to do so. He makes all the arrangements; He already assumed all the necessary costs. Trust that He did this for you. Tell Him that you trust Him. Tell others that you trust Him. From St. Paul’s letter to the Romans:

“‘The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,’ that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. As Scripture says, ‘Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.’ For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, ‘Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.'”

American Evangelical Christians participated–were, indeed, one of the key factors–in winning an astonishing victory against seemingly impossible odds. From a purely political point of view, it was fantastic. My advice is to not gloat. Don’t “Christsplain” how God “chose” Donald Trump at this Historic Time of Historical History to Keep Us from Baking Gay Cakes, or whatever. Maybe God chose Trump to destroy the U.S.A. Who can say, at this point? Live the Gospel. Don’t listen to people who say you’ve lost your witness because you supported literal Demogorgon. Don’t tell your siblings in Christ who occupy the other side that they’ve lost their witness for supporting literal Orcus. When we get to heaven, we will have enough about which to be ashamed–standing in front of the throne with our heads bowed and our feet shuffling–without the added shame of disregarding Christ’s command to us to love each other.

If you didn’t hear, Senator Ted Cruz gave a speech this past Wednesday, in which he asserted that the policies of Hillary and Obama were objectionable, and that the principles by which the Republican Party ostensibly stand–Americans’ freedom and support for the Constitution–needed to be defended. Great speech.

Oh, he also said that voters should “vote their conscience”, up and down the ticket. This was greeted with outrage by the Trumpspawn, because it was a signal that Sen. Cruz wasn’t going to bend down and lick Donald Trump’s tiny orange toes, as had nearly every other major GOP political leader. Excellent work, Senator. Instead of “Lyin’ Ted” it is “Lion Ted” (as in, you know, being brave as a lion. Lions as they are known in popular culture, anyway, because I’ve read that actual lions–but I digress).

With Trump, it is important that he always be seen as the Top Man, and Sen. Cruz’ refusal to bow and scrape thwarts that image. If it becomes widely known that someone is willing to call Trump out for a phony, and not take his bullying like a cringing crony, then Trump loses that image of “tough guy that can get things done.”

All Cruz said on Wednesday night was that people needed to vote for the Emperor who was actually wearing clothes. It’s not his fault that Trump parades about bereft of any conservative principles with which to clothe himself.

The following day, Sen. Cruz explained why he did not speak the words “I endorse Donald Trump”: it was because he took his vow to love and honor his wife, and his duty to honor his father, more seriously than his pledge to endorse Trump. I think, also, the good Senator was reluctant to endorse someone whose proposed agenda had very little in common with the actual Republican Party platform–which is supposed to be about limited, Constitutional government. Incidentally, Trump himself had already broken the same pledge some weeks prior, and stated at that time that he neither needed nor wanted Senator Cruz’s endorsement.

So, why did Sen. Cruz agree to give a speech at the GOP convention if he wasn’t going to endorse Trump? Because it was the GOP convention, not the Trump convention. I suspect that Sen. Cruz saw that no one was going to talk about freedom and the Constitution if he didn’t do it. Trump certain wasn’t going to talk about such mundane things when he could talk about himself, and about how he is able to save us all from all bad things because he’s Trump.

The day after the GOP convention ended, Trump was in a press conference, and started again to complain about the one guy with the courage to remain standing in his presence. He repeated the tabloid-sourced story that Mr. Cruz was associated with Lee Harvey Oswald, implying that the senior Mr. Cruz was somehow a part of the JFK Assassination. “It’s terrible; it’s just terrible” (or words to that effect).

In other words, Trump just broadcast to the world that he is a loony. Rather than responding to Sen. Cruz’s “snub” like a normal human being, and ignoring it, or even like a half-way competent politician, and using it to his advantage, and then turning his attention to his real opponent–Hillary Clinton–Trump feels compelled to deal with this slight against himself. He even openly mused about starting a Political Action Committee to fund someone to run against Sen. Cruz in the 2018 Texas Senate primary.

I wonder if Sen. Cruz knew that his “non-endorsement” was going to send Trump back to Loony-Town, and was trying to subtly show that the GOP had nominated someone who is not stable.

Trump is not conservative, either. He’s pro-abortion (practically speaking; he still lauds Planned Parenthood), anti-free market (he likes for the government to take people’s lands to give to businessmen and hates the idea of people making the best use of the product of their labor), and believes that if the government puts you on a secret “no-fly” list that your 2nd amendment rights can be abrogated.

What the GOP leaders who are now criticizing Sen. Cruz for his principled stand are really saying is: “Don’t worry about freedom or the Constitution. Join us in celebrating the bold decision to nominate a Democrat to be our standard bearer. Here, have some orange Flavor-Aid!”

There is a meme spouted by some of the Trumpspawn these days, that if one doesn’t vote for Trump then one is “voting for Hillary”. On the other hand, the Zergswarm that makes up the Democratic Party voter base are saying that a failure to vote for Hillary is a vote for Trump. Logically speaking, then, voting for neither of them is the same as voting for both of them! Win, and win!

I’m thinking that Trump will win this election. As of July 24, the Democrat (“Democratic”) Party is splintering, hard, over the leadership’s scandalous treatment of socialist Bernie Sanders, which was revealed in a WikiLeaks email dump. Hillary is not well-liked, even by (especially by?) her supporters. She’s personally a jerk of Trumpian proportions (heh), and will do anything to make a buck and keep her corruption-infused hide out of prison.
It is known.
I wonder if she will even survive until election day; she seems to have some medical issues (That xenomorph is about ready to burst from her chest, and, um, what is going on here?). If she wins, and manages to eke out a first term, I doubt things will be as bad some fearful folk assert.

I am not going to write in Sen. Cruz’s name this November. He urged people not to do that. Besides, there are other options for anyone who still (as Sen. Cruz does) cares about American liberty and Constitutionally restrained government (this, naturally, excludes the Democratic Party). One option is the Libertarian Party, whose ticket is Gary Johnson and William Weld. I am uninterested in voting for this ticket, since the Libertarian Party has a platform that favors antepartum infanticide, but Johnson/Weld is gaining in the polls, and it would be a good thing, I think, if a third party were able to break through the two-party barrier that has been imposed by the two major parties.

The other choice for liberty lovers is the Darrell Castle and Scott Bradley ticket of the Constitution Party. This is a much better team. I disagree vehemently with the Constitution Party’s stance on Free Trade (they assert, if I remember right, that free trade leads to socialism(!)), but since the GOP has nominated an anti-free trade, pro-abortion ticket this year, there is no reason for me to vote Republican.